Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aavak]

I dunno, a small DPS boost and better overall survivablility sounds exactly like what a strategic cruiser is supposed to do. Its not going to be cracking most battleship tanks but its a mean little cruiser.

Um. Actually. A well-fit Proteus with decent skills (lvl 3 ish in subsystems and 4-5 on support skills) can break a single well-fit BS' tank quite readily. While tanking harder than a BS. That said, any cap issues and you're screwed - the focus on DPS and tank really makes the ship's capacitor longevity plummet.

As for the Tengu thing, as a PVE boat their advantage over the Drake is the actual speed at which they move and the ability to either sig (speed) or shield tank all but the heaviest hitters. As PvP boats they are decent alone but really shine as part of a larger fleet. The point of a T3 is to be versatile - they may not do things as well as a comparably priced T2 cruiser, but they do a number of things competently.

As for the 6.4% damage boost, that is actually a significant boost in applied damage. Remember that a 5% per level bonus to resists for Amarr and Gallente has been deemed too strong by the devs and reduced to 4%/level. EvE truly is a game where a few extra percentage points really make a difference. The 10% damage bonus is actually inferior to the combined dam/ROF bonus - which is why with Odyssey a number of Gallente ships, for example, are having their flat damage bonuses replaced with a ROF bonus.

I reiterate that the point of a strategic cruiser is versatility. It has slightly better DPS...AND slightly better tank. AND it's smaller. AND it's faster. You're currently complaining about getting FOUR almost straight upgrades to one of the strongest battlecruisers in the game! Are they HUGE upgrades? No! A significant damage upgrade would be to, say, a Raven with Torpedos fitted - but at the expense of being far easier to hit due to your slow speed and much larger size.

You have gotten yourself into the trap of thinking that bigger = better in EvE, which is a very carebear mindset to have and is the number one reason for the endless complaining on the forums about how the much larger Mining Barges can be killed by a few small destroyers. If you want THAT, play WoW or any of the other insufferable themeparks out there.

A good reply, though I think the last paragraph was a bit unnecessary to be fair You kinda veered off into rant/flame territory (perhaps without intention), and I don't think Lord Bucket did anything to deserve it...

And yes, I realise that I'm being a derp for stepping into a conversation that I wasn't a part of, and possibly championing someone who doesn't want it. I have signed all the required consent forms, and waive all rights to not being pelted with vegetables, etc.

[LordBucket]

e gotten yourself into the trap of thinking that bigger = better in EvE, which is a very carebear mindset to have and is the number one reason for the endless complaining on the forums about how the much larger Mining Barges can be killed by a few small destroyers. If you want THAT, play WoW or any of the other insufferable themeparks out there.

No, that's not at all what I was talking about, and it's not even a bigger ship so I don't know where you're getting that idea from. Try reading posts before you toss out insults.

There are people out there claiming that their tengu can do over 1000 dps. When I put one together on the test server I came up with 395. That could be improved if I spent two weeks to train T2 HAMs instead of heavies, but I can do that just as easily in the drake, and I could have done that already rather than having spent the past few weeks training skills to fly the tengu. I don't care about tank, since I can already go afk in L4s in my drake. I think it's very reasonable to expect an improvement when moving from a dirt cheap, easily fitted generic T1 battlecruiser to spending an extra ~3 weeks of training to fly a half billion ISK ship than incidentally causes 4 days of permanently lost skill training time if it's destroyed. Going from being able to go afk while stationary, to "being able to" speed tank because I'm oh-so-small-and-fast-now is not really an improvement when I suddenly have to do it to survive because my shield hp is roughly a third what it would be the drake, dependant on capacitor, and susceptible to being webbed.

I started training for the tengu because of the sheer number of people recommending it as a high-dps boat for just about everything other than incursions. Not because of some totally not-relevant-to-this-discussion notion about "bigger being better." I already have Amarr battleship level 5.

So take your insults that are clearly your own personal baggage about totally other issues elsewhere.

[Poltifar]

Well. I guess I'll think twice before training for a Tengu then.

[LordBucket]

guess I'll think twice before training for a Tengu then.

That's why I wanted to try it on the test server before buying one. That might be part of the problem, though. Test server seems to be doing some strange things right now. Tried this fit, game reports 369 dps. But then I leave the ship and get right back in without changing anything and it reports 405 dps. If the test server is having issues as it seems to be, then all my previous numbers are unreliable.

But...same number of missile bays, same number of low slots, similar RoF and damage bonuses. It seems like their raw damage numbers should be simiilar. However...looking at it again right now....I notice that the tengu has what potentially works out to a 50% range bonus for assault missiles that the drake lacks. It's possible that the damage benefit of the tengu is simply that it's more practical to use assault missiles on a tengu than on a drake because it can close distance faster and hit with HAMs from further away. Sure, you can put assault missiles on a drake, but you generally wouldn't because you're unlikely to ever be close to enough to anything to hit it with them.

[JimiD]

Be careful about reported DPS unless you can also see the fit.  Ive seen the Merlin (frigate) quoted as having 232 DPS, which is fairly  horrifying compared to the paltry 117 DPS my Slasher does.  But then I tried fitting a few Merlins, and while you can acheive this, it is with Blasters and Void, one MASB, two Mag stabs, and two DPS rigs - in otherwords a very one dimensional fit.  It also has range (1406m Opt with 1,250m fall off) and tracking (0.378rad/s) issues.  These days I would not be afraid to take that fit on in a Slasher with Barrage or a TD.

Also T3s come under the Eve law of diminishing returns - significant extra cost for a small % increase.  It also sounds like you are working you way towards an appropriate fit in your own head - HAMs with a range bonus sounds good.  At least to me whose barely got out of frigates.

[Shakerag]

[...] fly a half billion ISK ship than incidentally causes 4 days of permanently lost skill training time if it's destroyed.

Wait, what?

[mostlikely]

There are people out there claiming that their tengu can do over 1000 dps. When I put one together on the test server I came up with 395.

5 minutes for a lvl4 usually means they pick specific missions with very short completion times to begin with.

1000 dps is very theoretical as you are indeed looking at a HAM tengu which is not practical in pve even with the range bonus.
~750 dps is more realistic using HM's, a reasonable skilled pilot and a couple of implants.

For a comparison using equal fitting my alt that gets up to 718dps in a tengu while doing 601dps in a drake (some of that comes from drones though). However at the same time going into the drake you lose 50% tank, 40% range and 40% speed while doubling your signature.

Naturally when using a passive tank on the drake instead signature and tank become trivial however speed still makes missions faster in their own way. Also the passive setup comes at a price of dps.

Speed tanking does require some initial attention to focus on webbers first however once those are gone the ability to afk is equal or greater compared to a drake. A counter argument I've heard a few times (thought I don't really feel that way myself) is that the extra tension will help if doing missions starts to get boring.

I am not suggesting you take all this any go for a tengu mind. However there are reasonable benefits and I'd say it will give a good return on isk/skill time invested without requiring huge amounts of either.

[BuriBuriZaemon]

HAMgu is the preferred setup.

And I am training for Tengu just because I like its look. First class logic there. :p

[maanahr]

[...] fly a half billion ISK ship than incidentally causes 4 days of permanently lost skill training time if it's destroyed.

Wait, what?

If you lose a T3, you also lose a level in one of the subsystem skills. Their fifth level takes about 4 days to train. It also used to be possible to avoid this by ejecting just before you were killed, but that doesn't work anymore. Some people who regularly pvp in T3's just don't bother to train that last level so they won't lose as much training time.

One of the advantages of a Tengu is simply that it's a cruiser. It's smaller so it takes less damage in certain circumstances, and it's faster and more agile, which makes it also easier to avoid damage and makes a big difference outside of highsec. I'd say that a battleship is better for running Lvl4 missions, but I can see why some would prefer a T3 for it.

[Shakerag]

What exactly is the justification for losing a skill level if you lose a ship?  That seems inconsistent and just kind of weird.

[maanahr]

I assume it was first intended as a trade-off you should consider when getting one. An extra risk, in exchange for flying more powerful ships. It hasn't been a problem for most people because you could just work around it by ejecting, and by now is mostly just accepted. The ingame justification is that capsuleers are much more tightly integrated with T3 ships.

[forsaken1111]

What exactly is the justification for losing a skill level if you lose a ship?  That seems inconsistent and just kind of weird.

The ingame lore justification is something like the implants you use to control the ship are much more tightly interwoven with your mind, so the destruction of the ship causes actual trauma which messes up your ability to function for a while and forcing you to relearn a skill, like learning to walk again after you have an accident.

[Tyg13]

What exactly is the justification for losing a skill level if you lose a ship?  That seems inconsistent and just kind of weird.

The ingame lore justification is something like the implants you use to control the ship are much more tightly interwoven with your mind, so the destruction of the ship causes actual trauma which messes up your ability to function for a while and forcing you to relearn a skill, like learning to walk again after you have an accident.

So basically in EVE, people who fly T3 in PvP are constantly experiencing intense mental trauma and they just get up, shrug their shoulders, relearn the skill and go right back to flying their ship?

[forsaken1111]

What exactly is the justification for losing a skill level if you lose a ship?  That seems inconsistent and just kind of weird.

The ingame lore justification is something like the implants you use to control the ship are much more tightly interwoven with your mind, so the destruction of the ship causes actual trauma which messes up your ability to function for a while and forcing you to relearn a skill, like learning to walk again after you have an accident.

So basically in EVE, people who fly T3 in PvP are constantly experiencing intense mental trauma and they just get up, shrug their shoulders, relearn the skill and go right back to flying their ship?

You sound surprised. This is a game where people are killed outright and wake up with no ill effects whatsoever.

[Sirus]

What exactly is the justification for losing a skill level if you lose a ship?  That seems inconsistent and just kind of weird.

The ingame lore justification is something like the implants you use to control the ship are much more tightly interwoven with your mind, so the destruction of the ship causes actual trauma which messes up your ability to function for a while and forcing you to relearn a skill, like learning to walk again after you have an accident.

So basically in EVE, people who fly T3 in PvP are constantly experiencing intense mental trauma and they just get up, shrug their shoulders, relearn the skill and go right back to flying their ship?

You sound surprised. This is a game where people are killed outright and wake up with no ill effects whatsoever.

Unless you forgot to keep your clone up-to-date, at least.